I think if you're a right winger who smokes weed, that makes you a libertarian, not a liberal.
Saprophyte
joined 1 year ago
There's an article, but the tldr is... In 1906, 51 years after the losers lost, the daughters of the confederacy wanted to remind Black people where their place was.
There are no noise-cancelling headphones to stop the U.S. Navy's 235-decibel pressure waves of unbearable pinging and metallic shrieking. At 200 Db, the vibrations can rupture your lungs, and above 210 Db, the lethal noise can bore straight through your brain until it hemorrhages that delicate tissue. If you're not deaf after this devastating sonar blast, you're dead.
EU and the UK both put in privacy protections for their citizens. Neither of those are dictatorships
So... He doesn't care that companies are selling this information, his only concern is who's buying it? Gee, I wonder how many of these companies selling his constituents information is paying for his campaign?
Wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. My wife recently bought the kids the original to play in the car while on road trips, so hearing it in the background while the kids laugh at it was a good refresher before watching this last night.
It's nostalgia, plain and simple. The throwbacks to the original characters, like Roxanne and Monique were fun with a few sensible chuckle level of jokes, but overall it's not something that would even be remotely fun if it wasn't for the nostalgic bit that reminds you of the original.
The two Santa Claus theory explains why that is. GOP strategy since the 70s
Nice try, I'm not downloading your app.
https://youtu.be/QZkSRlIs9o0?si=l7jYk8g92oIS4t3b
The evil part is having laws like this and then filling in their water sources with concrete.
The Supreme Court has adopted its first code of ethics - https://one.npr.org/i/1212836705:1212836706
This article does a pretty good job of going over the important parts of Article 2 of the US judicial code and talks about how Congress could regulate the Supreme Court as it does all other Federal courts. It would just take appointing an inspector general to enforce article 2 that already exist for lower courts.
The regulation would still maintain an independent decisional authority in the same vein is how they regulate the number of justices currently on the Supreme Court. The regulation itself would have nothing to do with the way that the justices reach their decisions, but would only cover their conduct outside of the court. The law is already in place, Congress just hasn't put the mechanism in place to enforce it.
That being said, they can't even pass resolutions in order to stop the time change which has near unanimous support across the population and all our other branches of government. It's my firm belief that the opposite of pro is con, so the opposite of progress must be...
You know there's a big difference between a liberal and libertarian, right?
Libertarian - an advocate or supporter of a political philosophy that advocates only minimal state intervention in the free market and the private lives of citizens.
Liberal - a supporter of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare.